Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp.

762–783, 2001
 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0160-7383/01/$20.00
www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures
PII: S0160-7383(00)00077-3

RURAL CULTURAL ECONOMY

Tourism and Social Relations
Moya Kneafsey
Coventry University, UK

Abstract: Considerable work has now been conducted into the ways in which the country-
side and related products are commodified, yet relatively few accounts have attempted to
examine the factors affecting local resident participation in this so-called “commodification
dynamic”. The aim of this paper is to explore some of these factors through a case study of
tourism development in rural Brittany. It is argued that a conceptual framework which com-
bines a cultural economy approach with a consideration of the historical trajectories of old
and new social relations is required in order to understand the processes which either drive
or hinder the commodification of contested knowledges at the local level. Keywords: com-
modification, culture economy, social relations, knowledge.  2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All
rights reserved.

Résumé: Économie culturelle: tourisme rural et relations sociales. On a déjà fait beaucoup
de recherches au sujet des façons dont on transforme la campagne et les produits apparentés
en marchandises, pourtant il y a relativement peu d’études où l’on examine les facteurs qui
ont un effet sur la participation des habitants locaux dans cette soi-disant “dynamique de
marchandisation”. Le propos du présent article est d’examiner quelques-uns de ces facteurs
à travers une étude de cas du développement du tourisme en Bretagne rurale. On soutient
qu’un cadre conceptuel, qui joindrait une approche d’économie culturelle à une considér-
ation des trajectoires historiques d’anciennes et de nouvelles relations sociales, est nécessaire
afin de comprendre les processus qui poussent ou qui gênent le marchandisation des con-
naissances contestées au niveau local. Mots-clés: marchandisation, économie culturelle,
relations sociales, connaissances.  2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION
The countryside is increasingly viewed as both a commodity in itself
and as a set of commodifiable signs and symbols which may be attached
to particular places, peoples, products, and lifestyles. As Hopkins notes,
The “countryside” is an ideal deeply entrenched in the geographical
imagination of Western societies, an image that is fundamental to the
production and consumption of rural tourism (1998a:65).
Through images and texts, attempts are made to attract tourists to
rural areas through the promotion of representations of idealized, sym-

Moya Kneafsey is Research Fellow at Coventry University Geography Department (Priory

Street, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK. Email <m.kneafsey@coventry.ac.uk>). Her doctoral research
at Liverpool University investigated the relationship between tourism and place identity in
Brittany and Ireland. She has recently worked on an EU project examining the promotion
of quality products in lagging rural regions. Her other research interests include regional
specialty food production/consumption and Celtic geographies.

762
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 763

bolic, cultural landscapes. Short, for example, notes that the contem-
porary myth of the countryside portrays a place where there is a less
hurried lifestyle,
where people follow the seasons rather than the stock market, where
they have more time for one another and exist in a more organic
community where people have a place and an authentic role. The
countryside has become the refuge from modernity (1991:134).
At the same time, as Cloke remarks, “the rural” is inescapably bound
up in very modern image markets. It is implicated in the “society of
the commodity” and the “society of the spectacle”, and is a “social and
cultural construct” which is “subject to a constant flux of production,
consumption, reproduction, representation, commodification,
manipulation and so on” (1994:171). This constant flux can be seen
in the construction of touristic images which, through mass media and
communications are available to ever larger audiences, many of whom
may be able to trace their own roots back to rural origins. Thus, the
rural is commodified not only as a physical place, but as a place with
spiritual resonances, with connotations of romantic simplicity and
golden traditionality. In many cases, the countryside is portrayed as a
container of traditional cultures, national identities, and “authentic”
lifestyles.
Considerable work has now been conducted into the ways in which
the countryside and related products are commodified (Bessière 1998;
Hopkins 1998b; Hughes 1992; Ilbery and Kneafsey 1998; Park and
Coppack 1994), yet relatively few accounts have attempted to examine
the factors affecting local resident participation in this so-called “com-
modification dynamic”. The aim of this paper is to identify some of
these factors through a case study of tourism development in rural
Brittany (Western France). The overall intention is to explore the
extent to which the notion of a culture economy, as proposed by Ray
(1998), provides a satisfactory understanding of a specific case of com-
modification. It is argued that a full appreciation of how a particular
culture economy works can be achieved only through considering the
complex ways in which historically layered and newer social relations
intersect within unique local territories.

THE CULTURE ECONOMY AND SOCIAL RELATIONS

The commodification of the countryside can be understood as part
of what Ray terms a “culture economy” approach to rural development.
This notion consists of strategies to transform local knowledge into
resources available for the local territory. In the broadest sense, this
knowledge can be thought of as “ways of doing things and ways of
understanding the world”. Such knowledge can be identified through
a range of cultural markers such as “traditional foods, regional langu-
ages, crafts, folklore, local visual arts, and drama, literary references,
historical and prehistoric sites, landscape systems, and their flora and
fauna” (Ray 1998:1,2). In a later paper, Ray (1999) describes these as
part of a “development repertoire” from which a territory can select
764 CULTURE ECONOMY

resources or techniques appropriate to requirements. The notion of a

repertoire encapsulates two key principles of endogeneity, namely the
idea of local ownership of resources and the sense of choice (local,
collective agency) in how to employ those resources.
Ray identifies four inter-related Modes which are distinguishable
within the culture economy and which can be discerned within the
case study presented here. Mode I is the commoditization of
local/regional culture and refers to the creation and valorization of
resources that have a place identity and that can be marketed directly
or used in the marketing of the territory. Ray identifies ethno/cultural
tourism as a prime instance of this, in addition to the examples of
regional agri-food products, regional cuisines, and crafts. He specifies
that the fixing of product/service to territory enables the locality both
to retain more of the economic benefit and to control the type of
economic activity that occurs. Mode II involves the construction and
promotion of a (new) territorial identity to the “outside” through exist-
ing organizations (local authorities, development agencies, etc.) or
new cooperative structures. This relates to territorial development
initiatives such as the European Union’s LEADER program. Mode III
engages the territorial initiative in selling itself internally to the com-
munities, businesses, groups, and official bodies of the local area. As
Ray notes, “the rhetoric of such programs and initiatives talks of raising
the self-confidence of local people and organizations, building confi-
dence in their own capacities to bring about local development, and
valorizing local resources” (1999:7). Mode IV emphasizes the norma-
tive capacity of the culture economy and can operate within each of
the other three. According to Ray, many of the manifestations of the
culture economy can be seen as reconstructions of the state economy
model at local or regional level. In other words, they are “attempts to
compete more effectively in the global economy mediated through a
soft form of local protectionism to control the impacts”. However,
Mode IV suggests that a territory may choose “alternative” develop-
ment paths which, for example, stress “local self-reliance in the use of
physical resources, a land stewardship ethic, or the cherishing of ‘close
community’” (1998:7–8). In this case, “love of place” at individual and
group levels becomes a guiding referent and local culture is redisco-
vered as a source of “local wisdom and ethics.” Thus, Mode IV focuses
attention onto the possibility of a “range of paths of development”
(1999:526).
As the following case study shows, the culture economy concept
detailed by Ray provides a useful framework for identifying the
resources or “knowledges” available to local economies and for analyz-
ing the strategies which can be employed to turn these into saleable
commodities. Yet the application of the framework also highlights
some of the difficulties involved in the attempt to commodify local
knowledge. For instance, as Ray acknowledges, the term “local” in
“local knowledge” is contentious and raises questions concerning the
nature of both. For instance, what types of knowledge are commodifi-
able for tourism? Who “owns” this knowledge or the rights to it? If the
idea is to ensure that the benefits of commodification stay within a
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 765

locality, how can ownership of knowledge be restricted to local people,

and how is “local” status defined? The case study presented here begins
to open up some of these questions and reveals some of the conflicts
inherent in attempting to mobilize local territorial knowledges in one
particular place over one particular period of time.
In order to understand why these conflicts occur, it is necessary to
consider the contested, changing, and unique nature of places. As Mas-
sey argues, places can be conceptualized as “articulated moments in
networks of social relations and understandings” (1994:154). Building
on this, it is suggested that an analysis of how a culture economy func-
tions must take account of the complex inter-relations between (a)
historically layered social relations which mediate attitudes towards
commodification, knowledge and tourism in general and (b) newer
social relations existing within and among localities. Ray perhaps hints
at this when he suggests that “we need to know more about the specific
relationships between place, history and the ongoing process of sym-
bolic construction” (1998:17). In broad terms, historically layered
social relations provide a sense of place (perhaps even a “love of
place”) and a feeling of continuity to the actors enmeshed within the
social relations of the here and now. In the case study presented here,
for example, the social relations of farming have helped shape contem-
porary local identities. The newer social relations can include recent
institutional and economic relationships with other places, the devel-
opment of new types of entrepreneurial activity, the arrival of new
inhabitants in rural areas, and the emergence of social trends such as
green and heritage tourism. These are mediated through existing local
social relations such as kinship ties, administrative structures, and polit-
ical and cultural organizations. Thus, as Massey (1994) notes, places
should be thought of as “processes”, distinct mixtures of wider and
more local social relations which in turn take specificity from the
accumulated history of a place. This case study will illustrate these and
related points.

Study Methods
This paper is based upon qualitative research and hopes to go some
way towards meeting Squire’s (1994) call for an extension of the use of
qualitative and ethnographic techniques in the field of tourism studies
(Kneafsey 2000b). As Crick (1989) notes, the “local voice” is often
absent from studies of the impacts of international tourism. The meth-
odology adopted for this study was thus guided by a wish to engage
with and record such local voices, an approach which anthropologists
have used to produce some particularly insightful accounts (Black
1996; Boissevain 1996; Chapman 1987; McDonald 1989). Two main
strategies were adopted: participant observation and semi-structured,
informal interviews. These were conducted with key informants includ-
ing local business people, tourism officials, politicians, and develop-
ment officers. Respondents, including proprietors of most of the attrac-
tions and accommodation facilities within the commune boundaries,
were initially selected through reference to tourism brochures and vari-
766 CULTURE ECONOMY

ous local authority publications available in nearby archives and

libraries. Interviews lasted from half an hour to over two hours, and
were conducted in a variety of settings, from offices, to bars, res-
taurants, and peoples’ own living rooms and kitchens. They were based
on a loose checklist of themes and questions, which was modified as
the issues of key importance at the local level became apparent. Using
a “snow-ball” strategy, further respondents were identified by inter-
viewees on the basis of their knowledge of the local area or involve-
ment in tourism-related activities. These included, for example, the
parish priest, a resident academic, and an 82 year old widow whose
family had once owned the land on which the Mougau bihan, a stone-
age monument, was located. The end result was 26 tape-recorded inter-
views plus others which, because they happened in more informal or
unplanned situations, were recorded in note-form or reflected upon
in field diaries. In effect, the research was “grounded” as described by
Strauss (1987) in that methods and analysis were not guided by strict
rules but were adapted to the diversity of social settings and unexpec-
ted contingencies of research. Transcripts were analyzed through a
process of annotating and coding whereby common themes in the
interviews were identified regarding respondents’ views on local cul-
tural identity, commodification, the impacts of tourism, and so on.
As mentioned earlier, the interviews were supplemented by a con-
tinuous process of participant observation (Burgess 1986; Fetterman
1989; Hammersley and Atkinson 1995). In this way, a richly textured
impression of the place was constructed, based on the collection of a
wealth of primary data in the form of field diaries (containing accounts
of events such as informal conversations, festivals and heritage days,
descriptions of participation in social activities such as dances, guided
tours and walks), as well as observations made during attendance at
local development meetings, talks and classes. These are supplemented
with secondary data such as photographs, newspaper cuttings, post-
cards, tourism publicity, local archival materials, policy documents, and
development plans. Fieldwork was conducted over an intensive
research period of eight months in Brittany during 1994 (including a
four month period of residence in the study area) which has been
supplemented with short return visits in successive years.

Breton Culture Economy

The case presented here is part of a comparative study investigating
aspects of rural tourism in two geographically peripheral localities in
the West of Ireland and Western Brittany (Kneafsey 1998, 2000a). The
aim in this paper is to concentrate on just one of them: Commana in
central Finistère, Brittany (Figure 1). But before looking in more detail
at how the culture economy operates in Commana, it is first necessary
to contextualize the case through a brief account of tourism develop-
ment in the region.
Brittany became a popular resort for the French and British during
the 19th century. The first railway lines to Nantes in 1852 and Rennes
in 1857 opened up the region to those seeking therapy and relaxation.
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 767

Figure 1. Map of the Study Region

Holiday residences appeared near the railway stations and growth was
especially rapid on the north coast due to the ease of access from Paris
and Britain. The late 19th century period saw a number of extravagant
constructions such as the 1892 Villa Crystal at Dinard. Meanwhile,
small towns and villages such as Saint-Enogat and Pont Aven became
home to writers and painters, the most famous of whom was Gauguin.
While the coastal towns developed into tourism resorts, however, the
interior remained relatively undiscovered and, during the 20th century
the inland areas concentrated mainly on agricultural production to
such an extent that Brittany is now one of the most productive areas
in the country.
The high levels of agricultural productivity have not been achieved
without social and environmental costs, many of which can be seen in
Commana. Intensification and rationalization have resulted in a declin-
ing laborforce and a decreasing number of holdings. As a result, many
rural populations have been decimated by out-migration, mainly to
Paris. Although the overall population decline has now been halted
by the in-migration of the mobile affluent and retired, resettlement
has occurred mainly in the coastal towns and in combination with the
continuing decline in farm employment, “this has served to weaken the
structure of rural society to the point where rural areas risk becoming
residential spaces associated with urban systems” (Dalton and Canévet
1999:9). Moreover, although the Breton agricultural system has seen
768 CULTURE ECONOMY

enormous success in terms of productivity, its long term future is far

from assured and in terms of value of output, a static, if not declining
regime has been established. Recognizing this, policymakers have thus
for almost two decades attempted to promote what can be described
as a culture economy approach to rural development, particularly in
the inland areas. For instance, 1980 was designated national “Year of
Heritage”, and the 1984–88 regional plan recognized the importance
of tourism for inland rural areas and argued for a new, more dynamic
approach to diversifying facilities and revitalizing the industry. At the
departmental level, the Comité Départemental du Tourisme (1993)
proposed a series of medium and long term objectives including efforts
to encourage weekend and low-season tourism, with reformation and
clarification of its structures, specialized research and training, all
through the establishment of an Observatoire Départemental du Tour-
isme, improvements in the interpretation and protection of heritage,
and greater communication and commercialization of the image of
Finistère.
Continuing a trend which, as shown earlier, can be traced back to
the 19th century interest in disappearing rural cultures, certain sec-
tions of the tourism market remain fascinated by the idea of “real” or
“authentic” holidays in clean natural environments (Collardelle 1994).
As Burlat points out, for these tourists, “[R]eal contact with the inhabi-
tant and his daily life, is a primary motivation” (1991:4). Evidently, this
type of tourism depends for its success upon the active involvement of
individuals at a local level who are able and willing to communicate
aspects of local culture to the tourist. Yet, as the director of the Tour-
ism Office in Rennes remarked,
the people who actually come to Brittany, attracted by its identity and
its difference, don’t necessarily find that which they have been prom-
ised: not because it doesn’t exist, but because how to access this heri-
tage is not always evident to someone from the outside (cited in Burlat
1991:7, author’s translation).

A major consultancy report into Breton tourism noted that “the Bre-
tons don’t realize the importance of tourism for the region. They are
farmers”. They “aren’t concerned by tourism. If you asked 100 people
in this town [a touristic town] if they are concerned by tourism, 10 to
15% say yes and the others don’t see that tourism helps them to make
a living.” The report urged the involvement of local populations in
tourism development but suggests that such participation is hindered
by “the feeling that it’s everyone for himself and God for all. The conse-
quence of this is mistrust of integration in a larger group …” (Maybury
1986:29, author’s translations).
Manifestations of these trends in tourism and agriculture can clearly
be witnessed in Commana, a small commune situated in the Monts
d’Arrée in the heart of Finistère. It has experienced population decline
from over 2,500 in 1901 to just 1,117 in 1990 and, due to the changes
in agriculture outlined above, there are very few employment opport-
unities in the area. Besides farming, there is some employment avail-
able at small businesses producing bottled water, jam, and agricultural
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 769

machinery. Many people commute to neighboring towns for work,

others are retired. The contemporary situation presents a stark contrast
to the past. Before World War II, Commana was a center of activity
for surrounding smaller settlements and supported such artisans as
carpenters, metal workers, masons, tailors, butchers, bakers, farmers,
and slate quarriers who worked in the nearby mountains. Today there
is no bus or train service to the village and only a limited number of
shops. The church, with its fantastic interior—a remnant of a time
when each commune poured its wealth and imagination into religious
architecture in an effort to impress its neighbors—is now damp and
neglected and only a handful of residents attend the weekly mass. At
the time of research, plans to redesign the village square had been
shelved due to lack of money. There have been some attempts to
develop tourism in the area but, as will be noted later, these have often
met with apathy on the part of the local population. In order to under-
stand why, it is first necessary to identify processes of tourism commodi-
fication in Commana within the framework of the cultural economy
as proposed by Ray.

Mode I: Commodification of Culture

Several authors have conceptualized the commodification of the
countryside (Cloke 1993; Marsden, Murdoch, Low, Munton and Flynn
1993). Although it is beyond the scope of this paper to investigate
those discussions, one of the most concise accounts is provided by Mit-
chell (1998), who suggests that commodification of the “countryside
ideal” is best understood in two stages. In the first, the countryside is
idealized. This can be understood as an outcome of rapid urbanization
which has provoked a nostalgia for a simpler life, one free of the tur-
moil, conflict, and complexity of industrialized societies. In the second
stage, entrepreneurs seek to satisfy and nurture yearnings for experi-
ences of the idealized countryside among relatively affluent, upwardly
mobile, and wealthy consumers. As Mitchell notes, their investments
lead to the re-creation of “pre-industrial landscapes” and the repro-
duction of “pre-industrial commodities”. The first contributes to visual
representations of the countryside ideal through, for example, resto-
ration or construction of vernacular building or streetscapes which, as
Urry notes, construct a “cleaned up heritage look suitable for the gaze
of tourists” (1995:219). The reproduction of the latter, meanwhile,
allows consumers to purchase not only objects, but also the ideal of
the objects, an ideal which symbolizes a pre-industrial mode of pro-
duction. As Britton notes,
commodities in this form become a means to an end: the purchase
of a lifestyle; a statement of taste and demonstration of the possession
of “cultural and symbolic capital”; an invigoration of the body; an
uplifting of the spirit; a broadening of the mind; a signifier of status
… (1991:454).
The reproduction of pre-industrial commodities is not so obvious in
Commana; tourists can buy certain reproduction artifacts, postcards,
770 CULTURE ECONOMY

and foodstuffs such as Breton cider, butter, and honey. But at the time
of research, there was not the same range of such commodities as
could be found in more developed destinations. In the case of Com-
mana, a different category which could be described as the re-creation
of pre-industrial, or “traditional cultures”, is emerging. Thus, its com-
modification centered around two main spheres of landscape and “tra-
ditional” culture.
Landscapes. The pre-industrial landscapes around Commana can be
divided into the idealized countryside and vernacular buildings. Evi-
dence of the former is found in Commana’s status as a “rural heritage”
commune and membership of the Parc Naturel Régionel d’Armo-
rique. This is one of several regional parks created by the Ministry of
Aménagement du Territoire in the late 60s–70s, designed to give town-
dwellers a hinterland of “green spaces, clear air, rural roots, and an
authentic ethnological heritage” (McDonald 1987:128). Comprising 39
communes from the Monts d’Arrée and funded from regional, depart-
mental and municipal sources, the Park contains a wildlife reserve and
a series of écomusées housed in renovated rural buildings such as old
mills and school houses.
Publicity materials for Commana draw attention to the opportunities
to enjoy water sports, pony trekking, and mountain biking in the
nearby hills. Following Britton (1991), the countryside surrounding
Commana can be described as a type of “leisure space” which offers a
“romantic” form of tourist gaze, in which “the emphasis is put upon
solitude, privacy and a personal, semi-spiritual relationship” with the
sight (Urry 1990:31). Near Commana there is also an interesting attrac-
tion called Art et Nature. Run by a private entrepreneur, it houses live
animals native to the region, as well as a macabre collection of stuffed
animals, taxidermy being the other money-making branch of the busi-
ness. The animals, both dead and alive, are housed in a strange fantasti-
cal world of the owner’s design, which reflects a mystical view of the
pre-industrial Breton natural habitat, with moss covered rocks, a run-
ning stream, old tree stumps, ferns, and creeping ivy disguising con-
crete and metal structures inside. Outside there are gardens and paths
and live wolves, boars, and deer roaming in wired enclosures. In vari-
ous places around the tour there are dotted poetic extracts extolling
space, pure air and silence. Proudly claiming a fiercely Breton self-
identity, the owner has a clear political and environmental stance, and
wants to be able to get back to “true” and “human” values which have
been obliterated in this age of cars, robots, and chemicals. As he put
it in his own poetic style:
You have seen the journey we made to the moon, and what have we
found there? Nothing but sand and dust. I believe that we should stay
on the earth first, and then begin to see that she is beautiful (interview
conducted in 1994).
Tourists can see and touch semi-tame badgers and foxes, and at the
gift shop on the way out they can buy bottles of Breton cider, postcards,
old farm remedies, and various rustic products.
Four vernacular buildings form the second component of Com-
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 771

mana’s pre-industrial landscapes. The first, the church, has not been
renovated specifically for tourism, but is incorporated into the product
Commana offers. It is one of a series of churches listed on a tourism
trail in central Brittany. Volunteers take those interested on guided
tours of the interior during the summer months. Second, the
écomusée is a restored and operational flour mill and farm buildings
with an attached museum (part of the Parc Naturel Régionel
d’Armorique). Tourists can look around the buildings, and their orig-
inal Breton farmhouse furniture and farming implements. They can
also attend classes such as bread-making, using the original oven at the
mill. The museum often caters for school visits and basically presents
depictions of by-gone days of rural life in the area. Here books, CDs,
and postcards can be purchased at the museum shop.
The third vernacular structure, the Mougau bihan, is a stone age
burial chamber located just outside the bourg. It is often used in bro-
chures as an iconic image of the Monts d’Arrée, vaguely suggesting
things ancient and Celtic. Apart from its use as an image, commodifi-
cation of this monument is limited. There is no information about it
and little signposting. The fourth, the gites, provide accommodation
in the area and are usually accredited by either Gites de France, or
the departmental tourism organization. The gites are an interesting
case of how regulatory bodies external to the locality attempt to impose
particular versions of rural authenticity on the buildings. For instance,
one couple who had come back after 30 years in Paris to renovate a
family homestead for use as a gite told of how the officials from the
Tourism Office had said that they needed to get real slates on the roof.
In the end they used modern tiles which were easier to maintain and
cheaper. But they still felt a need to justify their choice, as if aware
that they were not quite producing the authentic image. As the woman
of the house pointed out, tourists did not seem to notice:
And when they [the officials of the tourism offices] tell me that “you
don’t have slates”, I tell them straight away “listen, you give me a grant
and I’ll put slates up … since the clients have never said, ‘oh you
don’t have slates!’ It never bothered the clients …. The main thing
for them is that it’s isolated, that it’s nice inside; they don’t care about
the roof! Obviously it’s not as pretty, but the price … it’s always easy
to criticize, but when it comes to the money, that’s something else”
(interview conducted in 1994).
Gites de France instructs hosts that they should offer a warm and per-
sonal welcome. The lodgings should be in a place that is “rural, calm
and preserved, without danger and far from all pollution and centers
of considerable noise” , according to Le Guide du Créateur, Gites de
France. In order to be accredited by either Gites de France or the
department, prospective hosts must go through a series of stages which
include filling out registration forms, writing proposals, sending plans
and photos, and accepting visits from representatives. One woman,
who had at one time worked as an administrator with Gites de France,
told of the “draconian” rules laid down, and how she had to fight for
two years to get her gite accepted while refusing to undertake some
of the measures they wanted, which would have meant demolishing
772 CULTURE ECONOMY

parts of the house. She pointed to the old roof beams which she had
painted white, arguing that it might not meet recommendations, but
it was a sign of modernity and she wanted to live in a home and not
a museum.
Traditional Culture. The second main feature of Mode I in Commana
is the commodification of so-called “traditional” culture. As part of the
Parc Naturel Régionel d’Armorique, Commana is promoted as a place
with an “authentic ethnological heritage” which includes the Breton
language, music, and associated traditions. As will be shown later, this
promotion is aimed at local residents just as much as at tourists. Com-
mana is also the location for a cultural organization which runs Breton
language classes and which, at the time of research, was trying to pro-
mote language-based activity holidays. The project, however, faced con-
siderable skepticism. One of the main difficulties facing the organizers
lay in convincing the mayor and councilors that it was a good idea.
Although the project had received financial support from the com-
mune, a measure of skepticism remained evident among some of the
senior councilors. For instance, when the deputy mayor was asked if
he thought cultural tourism a viable strategy, his response remained
uncertain:
… I don’t know the number of people interested in that. I am
incapable of saying if there are 50, 100, 1,000 people interested by
this cultural tourism, I don’t know … (interview conducted in 1994).
Likewise, another councilor, and the director of a local enterprise
development unit seemed doubtful about the economic benefits of
cultural tourism. In his view, what was needed instead was infrastructu-
ral improvements, bigger events, and more services. Similarly the
mayor was not over-enthusiastic about tourism generally, tending to
emphasize the problems facing the commune, rather than the poten-
tial offered by tourism.
The main barrier facing the commodification of cultural resources,
however, appeared to be a failure to perceive that features such as the
Breton language could be of interest to tourists. When asked to identify
the main attractions of the area, respondents listed environmental and
architectural features such as the church, the écomusée, the stone age
monument, and activities such as mountain biking, horse-riding, walk-
ing, water sports and fishing. Relatively few people mentioned directly
aspects of Breton language and culture without being prompted. This
is supported by the findings of a survey carried out for the departmen-
tal tourism committee (Dagnet Maryvonne 1992) which found that the
most often cited features of cultural identity came under the heading
“religious architecture”, followed by “tourist sites” and “the sea”. The
Breton language, music, and fêtes came much lower down on the list.
Respondents then did not seem to associate culture with themselves,
or to see themselves as part of a product. Indeed, few of them spoke
Breton, or attended seemingly traditional events such as fest-noz
(literally, a “night festival” involving dance, food, and drink) and there
was considerable ambiguity apparent when respondents talked about
their own sense of identity.
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 773

Thus, when one couple who ran a gite were asked whether they
regarded themselves as Breton, the wife at first replied that she had
no opinion about the subject, but the husband stated “Breton first,
French after perhaps, if I have the time”, after which she then con-
curred “I feel really Breton.” In fact, the only native Breton speaker
who was interviewed, a Commana-born gite owner, stated “We are Bre-
ton-French. We are French in the first place … me, I’m against
detaching Brittany from France. We are Breton, but French in the first
case. What’s Brittany alone?” He also expressed a rather negative atti-
tude towards speaking or learning Breton, describing the fact that he
grew up speaking Breton as a “handicap” which he would not wish to
impose on his own children. Yet, as gite owners he and his wife are
cast as representative Bretons, and among their clients are Parisians
who enjoy learning and speaking Breton.
Other respondents suggested that there was no real basis on which
to build a cultural tourism product. The landlady of the bar-restaurant
said “It’s not really lively [in Commana]. There’s not really any enter-
tainment.” She brought up the example of some music sessions which
people tried to organize during a pilot cultural tourism project for
young speakers of minority languages. There was very little local par-
ticipation in the session, with musicians coming from towns further
afield and being joined by participants from the project. The landlady
concluded that “Here, at worst, I think that even the people who know
how to sing no longer do it.” Furthermore, in terms of the Breton
language, respondents remarked that only “les anciens” spoke Bre-
ton now.

Mode II: A New Territorial Identity

The projection of a new territorial identity occurs at several geo-
graphical scales. At the smallest scale, the commune is labeled as a
“Rural heritage Commune” and represented as part of les pays des enclos
(the parish enclosures region) and the Monts d’Arrée. The use of the
word pays is significant, for as Chapman notes, in “the rapidly urbaniz-
ing society of post-war France pays has [also] come to have a flavor of
yearning and nostalgia for lost or threatened rural values” (1987:220).
The touristic use of the term pays seeks to exploit this nostalgic
element, reinforcing the image of rural, authentic, timeless places. The
projection of territorial images to tourists disguises some of the com-
plexities of locally constructed territorial distinctions. For example, the
category montagnes which Commana is supposed to be the gateway to,
is ambiguous, especially as the mountain area has no clear limits but
rather sweeps gently down to the plains. Thus, the local population
choose their own boundaries. Some might not want to consider them-
selves part of the mountains, which are deemed by some to be back-
ward, and where the land is less valuable. Others would associate them-
selves with “mountain” values such as hard work and independence or
might be influenced by external interest in the mystique of the moun-
tains (McDonald 1989). Tourists are unaware of this; for touristic pur-
774 CULTURE ECONOMY

poses, communes are grouped together according to various cultural,

historic, and architectural features into a series of spaces.
The main manifestation of Mode II occurred some 30 years ago,
with the creation of the Parc Naturel Régionel d’Armorique. The park
produces glossy promotional materials advertising its attractions and
describes itself as “a place of reflection, experimentation, welcome, a
school of the environment and heritage.” It is “the expression of the
richness of heritage and the personality of an authentic region.”
Beyond the level of the park and the pays, Commana is included in
representations of Finistère, the most Breton part of Brittany, home
to its ancient language, traditions, wild coastlines, and mysterious
inland hills and forests.
Commana as represented through various brochures and signs fits
the image of Brittany and especially Finistère as a land of peaceful
rurality, tradition, and authenticity. The small brochure produced by
the commune focuses on the church and its interior, the stone age
burial site, the écomusée, the lake and mountains. There are no pic-
tures of people or farm machinery, no poultry sheds, tractors, and
lorries. In winter, the buildings seem rather less picturesque, the
church is damp inside, the creperie closes, the hotel serves only a mid-
day meal and the bars are virtually empty except for a few regulars,
mainly men who work on farms in the area or drivers of the huge
trucks which thunder through the village with their cargoes of battery
farmed turkeys or pigs.

Mode III: Territorial Initiatives

The main incidence of this is the park, which has tried to preserve
a strong cultural identity in the belief that this in turn will foster
entrepreneurship. In the editorial of a newsletter, its President urged
members to be “proud of a cultural identity which is our principal
asset” (Dihun 1990). Thus, it produces glossy news magazines, runs
language classes, study tours and cultural activities aimed mainly at the
local population and occurring outside the tourist season. The
écomusée at Commana tries to encourage locals to attend events such
as concerts, fest-noz, and language classes. However, at the time of
research, attendance was poor. The director joked that maybe there
was too much competition from the television, or maybe people were
just not interested.
Interviewees, meanwhile, grumbled that the park was an expensive
waste of money which did little for the commune. It was perceived as
a separate entity which had few real links with the community. For
instance, one observer surmised
They [the people running the Park] have a theoretical will to serve
and dynamize the local culture, but the problem is that they have lived
… not necessarily outside, but in any case, not implicated in the local
cultural life (interview conducted in 1994)
Although the state-sponsored écomusées were originally oriented
towards the community (Hoyau 1988; Poulot 1994), people in Com-
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 775

mana seemed generally unimpressed and uninterested in the content

of their local écomusée or any of the other show-pieces within the
park. One person said she was “ashamed” to send people there because
there was nothing to see, while another said that she personally was
uninterested in the “old tools” because, as she said “we knew those.”
Abram notes a similar degree of apathy towards an écomusée in the
Cantal, central France. She found that few local people visited it and
suggests that “by concentrating on the daily routine, or technology of
work and thus glossing over the political context of the lives of the
people who lived those routines, the écomusée mythologizes the life
of the farm it represents” (1996:182). In other words, the museum
invests the quotidian with new meanings which are not necessarily
shared by the people who lived their lives trying to escape the drudgery
of agricultural labor. Indeed, some of the older residents of Commana
remember when people still lived and worked at the site of the
museum.

Towards Mode IV?

Ray’s notion of a culture economy provides a useful framework for
analyzing the processes of commodification occurring in a locality or
region. It should be noted, however, that the modes are inter-related.
Thus, for example, the park is involved in Modes I, II, and III simul-
taneously. In the sense that the park has existed for three decades now,
it could be argued that each of these modes has become normative
(Mode IV) in relation to the park’s activities, but not necessarily in
relation to the locality or region as a whole. Indeed, the problem with
Mode IV is knowing exactly when the other modes could be considered
normative and what exactly normative means in these cases. Ray pro-
poses that within Mode IV a local economy may choose to pursue alter-
native development paths which are based upon a “ground identity”
which acts as a source of local wisdom and ethics. While there is evi-
dence that policy actors and some local entrepreneurs are trying to
encourage such alternative development paths, there is also evidence
that other sectors of the local population are not particularly interested
in them, and may even resist them. Interview material for instance
demonstrates contradictory attitudes towards elements of regional his-
tory and cultural identity.
The attempt to apply the framework to a case study reveals some of
the complexities involved in trying to implement such an approach to
rural development. For example, it is clear that the culture economy
approach is not applied by any one actor, but rather emerges from
the combined actions of various actors operating at different spatial
scales with sometimes conflicting agendas. Moreover, qualitative
research reveals that some resources such as landscape and architec-
ture are commodified more easily than others, with the attempt to
commodify local knowledges such as minority languages or traditional
music being particularly problematic. In order to better understand
some of these problems and complexities, it is suggested that a focus
776 CULTURE ECONOMY

on the inter-relationship of historical and newer social relations be

added to the cultural economy framework outlined by Ray.

Social Relations within the Culture Economy

As suggested by Massey, place specificity is not constructed out of
“some long internalized history”, but rather from the “constellation of
social relations, meeting and weaving together at a particular locus.”
History itself can be imagined as “the product of layer upon layer of
different sets of linkages, both local and to the wider world” (1994:154,
156). It is proposed here that, in order to understand local responses
to cultural economy approaches, there is a need to examine historically
embedded social relations and the newer relations that are mediated
through these.

Historically Layered Social Relations. The most influential historical

social relations in the case of Commana appear to be those which cast
the region of Brittany as peripheral to the nation state of France, and
those which revolve around the dominant economic activity, farming.
The unenthusiastic response to the écomusée in Commana can be
understood as part of a much wider reaction to the whole idea of a
regional park within the context of historically constructed relation-
ships between the region of Brittany and the centralized French state.
These relationships, in the past, were often highly politically charged.
The regional park was opposed for a number of reasons when it was
first established in 1969, with the left wing Union Democratique Bre-
tonne coining the term “Reserve d’Indiens”, to describe it. The general
fear was that the park would be used to halt economic development
and preserve the region as a “zone touristique”. To Breton militants,
this was all part of a process of internal colonization whereby Brittany
was plundered for its natural and human resources and the state
attempted to crush linguistic and cultural differences which were seen
as a threat to national unity (Favereau 1993; Keating 1988; Lebesque
1968; O’Callaghan 1983; Meadwell 1983; Reece 1979).
To certain agriculturalists and business people, meanwhile, the park
appeared as a threat to economic progress, an attempt to preserve
19th century stereotypes which represented the Bretons as objects of
curiosity and scientific interest, a race left behind on the fringe of
Europe (McDonald 1989). Indeed, early tourism in the region owed its
origins in part to the travels of authors such as Balzac, Hugo, Michelet,
Stendhal, and Flaubert who were seeking the romantic ideal of an
exotic, primitive civilization unconstrained by the modernist logic of
progress, control, and order. Such connotations persisted well into this
century (Berger 1977) and are often perpetuated in marketing images
which feature women in particular wearing traditional costume and
engaged in traditional activities such as dances and religious pro-
cessions. The Parisian bourgeois perception of the region as one of
rural primitivism contributed to what is sometimes referred to as a
“complex” about Breton identity whereby the traditional bearers of the
culture—the peasant farmers—rejected the symbols of the old way of
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 777

life such as the language, the fest-noz, and the dark country houses
(McDonald 1987).
This process was speeded up by World War I in particular, when
many Breton soldiers who had never before left their own parish
became increasingly aware of their position within the larger French
state. Having fought for that state, those who survived were determined
to ensure that their children enjoyed the benefits of citizenship, which
usually meant learning French—the language of progress, wealth, and
modernity (Hélias 1978). Many Bretons migrated to Paris in search of
work, leaving their seemingly archaic language and lifestyles behind.
The peasant farmers who stayed behind embarked on a campaign of
rapid modernization, adopting new farming techniques and a new
“scientific” approach to agriculture. These factors have acted as a bar-
rier to recognizing “local knowledges” such as language and traditions
as potential resources to be utilized within a culture economy. As the
director of the increasingly popular Festival InterCeltique commented,
“there was a kind of complex about Breton culture, and the communi-
cation of the region until now was never made in terms of culture, but
in terms of landscape” (interview conducted in 1994). This focus on
historical relations of domination thus helps to explain why, as Ray
acknowledges, a territory “selling itself to itself” can face inertia
resulting from “centuries of indoctrination that has devalued the local
culture, casting it as a barrier to development” (1998:7).
Like all the other rural communes in the area, Commana grew up
around an agriculture-based economy. The occupational profile of the
municipal council reflects the historical dominance of farm-related
employment in the commune. In the same way as the political rep-
resentatives of rural France as a whole are “either drawn from, or
respond to, an essentially agricultural community” (Buller 1997:224),
so five of the 15 members of the council were farmers. A further three
were retired, including the 69-year-old mayor. These individuals were
responsible for decisions about local spending plans and seemed reluc-
tant to devote resources to tourism development. Of course, the com-
position of the council did not reflect the opinions of everyone in the
commune. For instance, one business woman said that “if this com-
mune wants to keep a young population which is already very small,
it absolutely must open up towards tourism”, while another com-
plained that the local administration had done nothing to promote
this industry. Another respondent, an architect who worked in one of
the large towns within commuting distance, argued that the commune
was “paralyzed by the people from the pays who are more conservative.”
In referring to the people from the pays, he meant the farming com-
munity, the older people who were born and bred in the area and
who did not envisage tourism as an important development path for
the commune. As one agricultural worker said, with some pride, “We
are agriculteurs first of all, we work 365 days a year.” He added that
tourism represents only “two months of activity in Brittany”.
Added to this there could be the remains of a historical animosity at
the intrusion of the nouveau riche of Paris, particularly into “la Bretagne
profond” (Favereau 1993:77). Tourists were sometimes derided and
778 CULTURE ECONOMY

often met with an unfriendly if not hostile reception (Chapman 1987).

This seemed to apply particularly to French tourists and traces of it
can be found today. One couple who rent out rooms in their house
told of how they prefer foreigners because they take an interest in the
area, and are generally more polite and less demanding than French
tourists who “think we are just there to serve them”. The hostility to
tourism could stem from the fact that in the past the population did
not benefit greatly from its growth. In addition the seasonal work pro-
vided by tourism was regarded as inferior, and not real work. Indeed,
this continues to be the case, with all respondents stressing that “you
cannot live by tourism alone”.
In general, culture is not objectified among the farming population
in the region. As shown by anthropologists such as McDonald (1989)
and Chapman (1987), the people tourists might regard as exponents
of genuine traditional lifestyles have often rejected them in the inter-
ests of progress, not least because they were educated into believing
that they were symbols of ignorance and poverty. In the 70s, when
policymakers began to look at developing rural tourism, they found
that
a problem posed itself: the paysans, in becoming producers, were los-
ing touch with their environment. Although in the past the country
people knew perfectly the local history, maintained oral traditions and
their own culture, these “paysannes modernes” were in the process of
abandoning all that (Burlat 1991:6; author’s translation).
Furthermore, local development workers pointed out that farm tour-
ism often required an investment beyond the means of smaller farmers
who are exactly the people who need the additional income that tour-
ism can provide. Yet, although the agriculturalists may have abandoned
old traditions and cultural practices, those symbols are now being re-
evaluated and appropriated by new kinds of people: mainly urbanites
in search of a rural idyll. For example, in the immediate vicinity of
Commana, there was only one ferme-auberge, which offered home-pro-
duced foods and farm-based activities. The proprietor was not orig-
inally a farmer, though, having bought the 17th century property four
years ago. New actors such as these are constructing new social
relations between themselves and other actors. Their presence helps
to explain, in large part, why there is any commodification in Com-
mana at all.

Newer Social Relations. Newer social relations are layered over, and
mediated through, the sedimented social relations already established
within places. In the case of Commana, the major new social relations
revolve around new public institutions and new individuals arriving
into the commune.
Among public institutions, as already noted, a language organization
in Commana was, at the time of research, making attempts to establish
cultural tourism in the commune. Through its activities, the organiza-
tion was building relationships with other networks including regional,
national and European funding agencies, minority language groups,
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 779

particularly in other Celtic regions and adult education institutions

throughout Europe. This was adding another set of social relations to
those already established by the longer-term activities of the park,
which had created relationships with personnel in other regional parks
in France, with tourists from many countries and, through an exchange
program, with communities in Pembrokeshire, Wales. In the accommo-
dation sector, regulatory institutions operating at national, regional,
and departmental levels were also involved. Thus, it can be seen that
these institutions are in the process of spinning new webs of social
relations which stretch within the locality and beyond. The actors
operating within these webs can be seen as promoters of commodifi-
cation within the culture economy, both through their own invest-
ments and through attempts to encourage other people resident in
the area to commodify local resources. Their chances of success were
improved to some extent by the existence of new inhabitants in the
commune.
Aiding these institutions, as in many rural areas, are new people
who are moving into Commana. It is they who are objectifying and
commodifying culture and welcoming tourists to the “real Brittany”.
While they are described here as incomers, this is not necessarily how
they see themselves, particularly as they may have lived in the com-
mune for many years. Indeed, the categories of local and incomer are
best understood as being negotiable (Kohn 1997). As Waldren shows,
it is useful to think of place identities as being composed through a
symbiosis of insiders and outsiders and to conceive of individuals as
experiencing and constructing for themselves “degrees of insideness
and outsideness” (1997:63). The process of rural in-migration in Brit-
tany is now well established, dating back to the “post 68” years when,
as McDonald notes, French social scientists began to talk of the “end
of the peasants” and back-to-the-land enthusiasts started moving into
rural areas “shedding studies and degrees for soil and simplicity”
(1987:127). Thus, in Commana most of the gite owners were people
from urban areas who were seeking a more pure, peaceful and better
lifestyle, and they used tourism to fund the restoration of the old
properties which they had bought. They were more likely to attend
fest-noz, go to the local museums, and express an interest in the Breton
language. Indeed, one recent incomer ran “Breton nights” at his aub-
erge which included story-telling, songs, and traditional Breton food.
Although there was no evidence of friction caused by the activities of
these newer residents, other researchers have shown that incomers’
interests in perceived traditions can cause discord when, for example,
they obstruct modernizing changes introduced by longer term resi-
dents (Waldren 1996) or complain about aspects of rural life that do
not fit into their idyllic constructions of the countryside.
In short, the commodification which is occurring is, on the whole,
driven by actors from beyond the immediate locale. These include
employees of the two state-funded institutions which have been dis-
cussed (the écomusée and the language organization), the majority of
whom had lived and worked in different cultural milieux. Moreover,
the definitions of what constitutes a cultural commodity, such as a gite,
780 CULTURE ECONOMY

or a ferme auberge, are invented by agencies far removed from Com-

mana. These regulations contribute to the construction of specific ver-
sions of what the “authentic” Breton experience actually consists of,
which may in turn be accepted or rejected by different groups of
people who hold different perceptions of place identity.

CONCLUSION
The aim in this paper has been to apply Ray’s (1998) culture econ-
omy framework to a case study of commodification for rural tourism
and to suggest that a deeper understanding of how a culture economy
works can be gained through a consideration of the contested nature
of place identity. This involves recognizing the historic and newer
social relations which constitute places, a dimension which Ray does
not discuss in much depth. This focus on social relations should help
to grasp what Ray (1999:524) calls the “creative tension” that exists
between the local context and extra-local forces and thus avoid the
tendency to create a set of oppositions under the headings global/local
and endogenous/exogenous. Urry’s point that one should seek to ana-
lyze the “complex interconnections of both global and local processes”
is useful in that it is such interconnections which “account for the
particular ways in which an area’s local history and culture is made
available and transformed into a resource of local economic and social
development within a globally evolving economy and society”
(1995:152). Therefore, this case study has tried to identify the intercon-
nections existing between organizations and individuals both within
Commana and between Commana and other places, organizations, and
individuals elsewhere.
In this case study, Mode I of the culture economy was evident in the
commodification of landscape in terms of an “idealized countryside”
and “vernacular buildings”. Moves were also being made to begin com-
modifying so-called “traditional” culture. Mode II was apparent in pro-
motional activities operating at various geographical scales and Mode
III was being implemented mainly by the Parc Naturel Régionel d’Ar-
morique. Evidence for the emergence of Mode IV was more difficult
to find.
Overall, attempts to establish a culture economy met with some apa-
thy on the part of the local population for reasons attributable to the
specific mix of historical and newer social relations converging within
Commana and shaping attitudes towards traditional knowledge and
culture. The account presented here has identified those relations
which seemed most influential in this particular place at the time of
research and it is inevitably selective. Nevertheless, the study has dem-
onstrated the need for a holistic and qualitative approach to examining
local level processes of commodification. On the basis of this, it is sug-
gested that more in-depth, qualitative work is required in order to both
record “local voices” and gain a greater understanding of how “local
people”, whether long-standing residents or new arrivals, make sense
of local knowledge, commodification and tourism.왎
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 781

Acknowledgements—The author thanks the people of Commana for responding to her

many questions and hopes that the present publication does not in any way violate the
trust which was extended to her. This paper is based on research which was carried out
for a PhD at Liverpool University and funded by the Economic and Social Research
Council (award No. R00429334189).

REFERENCES
Abram, S.
1996 Reactions to Tourism: A View from the Deep Green Heart of France. In
Coping with Tourists: European Reactions to Mass Tourism, J. Boissevain, ed.,
pp. 174–203. Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Bessière, J.
1998 Local Development and Heritage: Traditional Food and Cuisine as Tour-
ist Attractions in Rural Areas. Sociologia Ruralis 38(1):21–53.
Berger, S.
1997 Bretons and Jacobins: Reflections on French Regional Ethnicity. In Eth-
nic Conflict in the Western World, J. Esman, ed., pp. 159–178. Ithaca NY:
Cornell University Press.
Black, A.
1996 Negotiating the Tourist Gaze: The Example of Malta. In Coping with
Tourists: European Reactions to Mass Tourism, J. Boissevain, ed., pp. 112–
142. Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Boissevain, J.
1996 Ritual, Tourism and Cultural Commoditization in Malta: Culture by the
Pound? In The Tourist Image: Myths and Myth-Making in Tourism, T. Selwyn,
ed., pp. 105–119. Chichester: Wiley.
Britton, D.
1991 Tourism, Capital and Place: Towards a Critical Geography of Tourism.
Environment and Planning D, 9:451–478.
Buller, H.
1997 La Fin Du Résidualisme? Rural Policy Evolution in France. Built Environ-
ment 23:221–228.
Burgess, R.
1986 Being a Participant Observer. In Qualitatitive Approaches in Social and
Geographical Research, Occasional Paper No. 26. Department of Geography
and Earth Science, Queen Mary College, University of London.
Burlat, A.
1991 Le tourisme culturel: Accueiller sans perdre son âme. Ar Men
37(August).
Cloke, P.
1993 The Countryside as Commodity: New Spaces for Rural Leisure. In Leisure
and the Environment, S. Glyptis, ed., pp. 53–65. London: Belhaven Press.
1994 (En)culturing Political Economy: A Life in the Day of a “Rural Geogra-
pher”. In Writing the Rural: 5 Cultural Geographies, P. Cloke, M. Doel, D.
Matless and N. Thrift, eds., pp. 149–189. London: Chapman.
Chapman, M.
1987 A Social Anthropological Study of a Breton Village with Celtic Compari-
sons, PhD dissertation in social anthropology, University of Oxford.
Collardelle, M.
1994 Le tourisme culturel: une chance pour la culture, le tourisme et l’écono-
mie. Cahiers Espaces, No. 37.
Comité Départemental du Tourisme
1993 Tourisme et Amenagement du Territoire. Quimper: Comité Départmen-
tal du Tourisme.
Crick, M.
1989 Representations of International Tourism in the Social Sciences: Sun,
Sex, Sights, Savings and Servility. Annual Review of Anthropology 18: 307–344.
Dagnet Maryvonne Consulting Marketing
1992 Etude sur l’image Touristique du Finistère (undertaken for the Comité
Départmental du Tourisme). Rennes: Maréchal-Juin.
782 CULTURE ECONOMY

Dalton, R., and Canévet, C.

1999 Brittany: A Case Study in Rural Transformation. Geography, 84(1):1–10.
Dihun,
1990 Editorial. Dihun (9):3.
Favereau, F.
1993 Bretagne Contemporaine: Langue, Culture, Identité. Rennes: Skol Vre-
izh.
Fetterman, D.
1989 Ethnography Step by Step. Applied Social Science Research Methods Ser-
ies, Vol. 17 Newbury Park CA: Sage.
Hammersley, M., and P. Atkinson
1995 Ethnography: Principles in Practice (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Hélias, P.
1978 The Horse of Pride: Life in a Breton Village. New Haven: Yale Univer-
sity Press.
Hopkins, J.
1998a Signs of the Post-Rural: Marketing Myths of a Symbolic Countryside.
Geografiska Annaler 80B:65–81.
1998b Commodifying the Countryside: Marketing Myths of Rurality. In Tour-
ism and Recreation in Rural Areas, R. Butler and C. Hall, eds., pp. 139–156.
Chichester: Wiley.
Hoyau, P.
1988 Heritage and “The Conserver Society”: The French Case. In The Museum
Time-Machine: Putting Cultures on Display, R. Lumley, ed., pp. 27–35. Lon-
don: Routledge.
Hughes, G.
1992 Tourism and the Geographical Imagination. Leisure Studies 11:31–42.
Ilbery, B., and M. Kneafsey
1998 Product and Place: Promoting Quality Products and Services in the Lag-
ging Rural Regions of the European Union. European Urban and Regional
Studies 5(4):329–341.
Keating, M.
1988 State and Regional Nationalism: Territorial Politics and the European
State. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Kneafsey, M.
1998 Tourism and Place Identity: A Case Study in Rural Ireland. Irish Geogra-
phy 31(2):111–123.
2000a Tourism, Place Identities and Social Relations in the European Rural
Periphery. European Urban and Regional Studies 7(1):35–50.
2000b Changing Roles and Constructing Identities: Ethnography in the Celtic
Periphery. In Ethnography and Rural Research, A. Hughes, C. Morris and S.
Seymour, eds. Cheltenham: Countryside and Community Press.
Kohn, T.
1997 Island Involvement and the Evolving Tourist. In Tourists and Tourism:
Identifying with People and Places, S. Abram, J. Waldren and D. Macleod,
eds., pp. 15–28. Oxford: Berg.
Lebesque, M.
1968 Chroniques Bretonnes. Rennes: Editions Bretagnes.
Marsden, T., J. Murdoch, P. Lowe, R. Munton, and A. Flynn
1993 Constructing the Countryside. London: UCL Press.
Massey, D.
1994 Space, Place and Gender. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Maybury, B.
1986 Une Région et son Avenir: les problèmes et les chances du tourism en
Bretagne. Barry Maybury: Conseil en Marketing et Publicité.
McDonald, M.
1987 Tourism: Chasing Culture and Tradition in Brittany. In Who From Their
Labor Rest? Conflict and Practice in Rural Tourism, M. Bouquet and M. Win-
ter, eds., pp. 120–134. London: Gower.
1989 We are Not French: Language, Culture and Identity in Brittany. Lon-
don: Routledge.
 MOYA KNEAFSEY 783

Mitchell, C.
1998 Entrepreneurialism, Commodification and Creative Destruction: A
Model of Post-modern Community Development. Journal of Rural Studies 14:
273–286.
Meadwell, H.
1983 Forms of Cultural Mobilization in Québec and Brittany, 1870–1914. Com-
parative Politics 15:401–419.
O’Callaghan, M.
1983 Separatism in Brittany. Redruth: Dyllansow Truran.
Park, D., and P. Coppack
1994 The Role of Rural Sentiment and Vernacular Landscapes in Contriving
Sense of Place in the City’s Countryside. Geografiska Annaler 76B:161–172.
Poulot, D.
1994 Identity as Self-Discovery: The Ecomuseum in France. In Museum Cul-
ture: Histories, Discourses, Spectacles, D. Sherman and I. Rogoff, eds., pp.
66–84. London: Routledge.
Ray, C.
1998 Culture, Intellectual Property and Territorial Rural Development. Sociol-
ogia Ruralis 38:3–19.
1999 Towards a Meta-Framework of Endogenous Development: Repertoires,
Paths, Democracy and Rights. Sociologia Ruralis 39:521–531.
Reece, J.
1979 Internal Colonialism: The Case of Brittany. Ethnic and Racial Studies 2:
274–292.
Short, J.
1991 Imagined Country: Society, Culture and Environment. London: Rout-
ledge.
Squire, J.
1994 Accounting for Cultural Meanings: The Interface between Geography
and Tourism Studies Re-examined. Progress in Human Geography 18:1–16.
Strauss, A.
1987 Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Urry, J.
1990 The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. Lon-
don: Sage.
1995 Consuming Places. London: Routledge.
Waldren, J.
1997 We are not Tourists—We Live Here. In Tourists and Tourism: Identifying
with People and Places, S. Abram, J. Waldren and D. Macleod, eds., pp. 51–
70. Oxford: Berg.
1996 Insiders and Outsiders: Paradise and Reality in Mallorca. Oxford: Ber-
ghahn Books.

Submitted 8 October 1999. Resubmitted 20 June 2000. Accepted 31 July 2000. Final version
18 August 2000. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Jeremy F. Boissevain